Skip to content

refactor: move gateway modules from agentic-core to agentic-server#35

Merged
maralbahari merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
refactor/core-server-boundary
May 29, 2026
Merged

refactor: move gateway modules from agentic-core to agentic-server#35
maralbahari merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
refactor/core-server-boundary

Conversation

@franciscojavierarceo
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

  • Moves proxy.rs, readiness.rs, config.rs, and error.rs from agentic-core to agentic-server — these are gateway-specific concerns, not framework-agnostic core abstractions
  • Renames ConfigGatewayConfig to clarify the struct's scope
  • Migrates all crate Cargo.toml files to use [workspace.dependencies] declarations
  • Addresses feedback from @maralbahari on refactor: restructure into 3-crate workspace per ADR-03 #29

Test Plan

  • cargo build — clean
  • cargo test — 25/25 pass
  • cargo clippy --all-targets -- -D warnings — clean
  • cargo fmt -- --check — clean

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Move proxy, readiness, config, and error modules from agentic-core to
agentic-server since they are gateway-specific concerns. Migrate all
crate Cargo.tomls to use workspace-level dependency declarations.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <farceo@redhat.com>
@franciscojavierarceo franciscojavierarceo force-pushed the refactor/core-server-boundary branch from b32a447 to 0769d19 Compare May 28, 2026 18:59
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ashwing ashwing left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good — moving the proxy stuff to agentic-server makes sense since it's all gateway-specific right now.

One thing — PR #33 is adding the store layer which should probably land in agentic-core (it's the framework-agnostic stuff from ADR-03). With this emptying core out, just want to make sure the two PRs don't step on each other around lib.rs. Probably fine since yours just leaves the placeholder comment, but figured I'd flag it.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Makes sense to keep this alive. Might be worth updating the comment to hint at what's coming (store traits, executor, step functions) so future contributors know this isn't dead code.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good call — updated the comment to hint at what's coming.

franciscojavierarceo and others added 2 commits May 28, 2026 23:35
…boundary

Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <farceo@redhat.com>

# Conflicts:
#	crates/agentic-server/Cargo.toml
#	crates/agentic-server/src/app.rs
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <farceo@redhat.com>
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@franciscojavierarceo franciscojavierarceo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for flagging — we expect this PR to merge before #33, so it should be a clean base for the store layer to land on top of.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@maralbahari maralbahari left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, Thanks

@maralbahari maralbahari merged commit d1989a5 into main May 29, 2026
3 checks passed
@leseb leseb deleted the refactor/core-server-boundary branch May 29, 2026 08:18
@leseb
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

leseb commented May 29, 2026

@maralbahari @franciscojavierarceo this goes against ADR3, we have agentic-core containing all functions, proxy_request is a framework agnostic request, takes a payload and passes to the inference backend, if we put in the server now praxis (or any other gw) has to bring the axum dep too and it’s not what we want. thanks!

can we revert?

@franciscojavierarceo
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

yeah sorry @leseb

@franciscojavierarceo
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@maralbahari we can discuss more in slack (or here too of course)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants